ICAR: endoscopic skull‐base surgery

n/

A Review on Feasibility of Silkworm Pupal Meal in Livestock and Poultry

The rising cost of soy meal and other ingredients for animal and poultry feed has sparked a hunt for protein alternatives. Pupae of silkworms are a good source of protein and are included in the natural feed diet. Over the last decade, studies on the replacement of feedstuff with silkworm pupal have emerged with promising results. The silkworm pupae, which are a byproduct of the silk reeling industry, possess a high nutritional value which makes them a great choice for poultry feed. Dry pupae contain 50–70% crude protein and 24–33% crude lipid and is a high-quality insect protein source with a rich, balanced content of essential amino acids. Recommended inclusion levels of silkworm pupae meal have been developed as a result of several studies conducted on livestock species. This meal is guaranteed to provide better growth performance than commercial meal (soyabean meal)

Stronger π···π Interaction Leads to a Smaller Thermal Expansion in Some Charge Transfer Complexes

Crystal structures and thermal expansion properties have been studied for hexamethylbenzene (HMB), picric acid (PIC), tetracyanobenzene (TCB), HMB–PIC complex, and HMB–TCB complex. HMB–PIC and HMB–TCB form charge transfer complexes in the solid state as well as in solution. From the UV–vis spectroscopy study, it has been found that HMB–TCB forms a stronger π···π complex than HMB–PIC. On the other hand, HMB, in its crystal structure, forms a very weak π···π stacking interaction. A thermal expansion study shows that thermal expansion along the stacking direction is highest in HMB, which is followed by HMB–PIC and then by HMB–TCB complexes. Therefore, this study shows that stronger π···π stacking interaction leads to a weaker thermal expansion in the materials

Steering the Host Network from Cage to Channel by π···π Interactions among the Guest Molecules

2,4,6-Tris­(4-bromophenoxy)-1,3,5-triazine (BrPOT) preferably forms a cage type of structure with guest molecules of hexamethylbenzene (HMB) or hexafluorobenzene (HFB) individually. However, when both guests are present simultaneously, strong π···π stacking interactions between the π electron-rich HMB and π electron-deficient HFB guest molecules force the host molecules to assemble in a channel structure to include the π···π stacked guest molecules inside the channel. Picric acid (PA) and 1,3,5-trinitrobenzene (TNB) form charge transfer complexes with HMB inside the channel, and the nature of these charge transfer complexes are different from that of the binary complexes of HMB–PA or HMB–TNB. All three guest molecules, HMB, PA, and TNB, have been simultaneously included in the channel lattice of BrPOT to produce a quaternary complex

Synthesis and pharmacological evaluation of second-generation phosphatidic acid derivatives as lysophosphatidic acid receptor ligands

Short-chain phosphatidic acid derivatives, dioctanoyl glycerol pyrophosphate (DGPP 8:0, 1) and phosphatidic acid 8:0 (PA 8:0, 2), were previously identified as subtype-selective LPA1 and LPA3 receptor antagonists. Recently, we reported that the replacement of the phosphate headgroup by thiophosphate in a series of fatty alcohol phosphates (FAP) improves agonist as well as antagonist activities at LPA GPCR. Here, we report the synthesis of stereoisomers of PA 8:0 analogs and their biological evaluation at LPA GPCR, PPARγ, and ATX. The results indicate that LPA receptors stereoselectively interact with glycerol backbone modified ligands. We observed entirely stereospecific responses by dioctyl PA 8:0 compounds, in which (R)-isomers were found to be agonists and (S)-isomers were antagonists of LPA GPCR. From this series, we identified compound 13b as the most potent LPA3 receptor subtype-selective agonist (EC50 = 3 nM), and 8b as a potent and selective LPA3 receptor antagonist (Ki = 5 nM) and inhibitor of ATX (IC50 = 600 nM). Serinediamide phosphate 19b was identified as an LPA3 receptor specific antagonist with no effect on LPA1, LPA2, and PPARγ. © 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Cariprazine versus risperidone monotherapy for treatment of predominant negative symptoms in patients with schizophrenia: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Although predominant negative symptoms of schizophrenia can be severe enough to cause persistent impairment, effective treatment options are lacking. We aimed to assess the new generation antipsychotic cariprazine in adult patients with predominant negative symptoms. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, phase 3b trial, we enrolled adults aged 18-65 years with long-term (>2 year), stable schizophrenia and predominant negative symptoms (>6 months) at 66 study centres (mainly hospitals and university clinics, with a small number of private practices) in 11 European countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive web response system to 26 weeks of monotherapy with fixed-dose oral cariprazine (3 mg, 4.5 mg [target dose], or 6 mg per day) or risperidone (3 mg, 4 mg [target dose], or 6 mg per day); previous medication was discontinued over 2 weeks. The primary outcome was change from baseline to week 26 or end of treatment on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale factor score for negative symptoms (PANSS-FSNS) analysed in a modified intention-to-treat population of patients who had follow-up assessments within 5 days after last receipt of study drugs with a mixed-effects model for repeated measures. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with EudraCT, number 2012-005485-36. FINDINGS: Between May 27, 2013, and Nov 17, 2014, 533 patients were screened and 461 (86%) patients were randomised to treatment (230 for cariprazine and 231 for risperidone); 460 were included in the safety population (one patient discontinued before study drug intake). 227 (99%) of 230 patients in the cariprazine group and 229 (99%) of 230 patients in the risperidone group were included in the modified intention-to-treat population (178 [77%] in each group completed 26 weeks of treatment). Mean daily doses were 4.2 mg (SD 0.6) for cariprazine and 3.8 mg (0.4) for risperidone. Treatment-emergent adverse events (eg, insomnia, akathisia, worsening of schizophrenia, headache, anxiety) were reported in 123 (54%) patients treated with cariprazine and 131 (57%) patients treated with risperidone. Use of cariprazine led to a greater least squares mean change in PANSS-FSNS from baseline to week 26 than did risperidone (-8.90 points for cariprazine vs -7.44 points for risperidone; least squares mean difference -1.46, 95% CI -2.39 to -0.53; p=0.0022; effect size 0.31). One patient in the risperidone group died of a cause regarded as unrelated to treatment. INTERPRETATION: Our results support the efficacy of cariprazine in the treatment of predominant negative symptoms of schizophrenia. FUNDING: Gedeon Richter Plc